Council Tax doubled since Labour came to power

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Cobbydaler

It's smoke & mirrors with all politicians...

Give with one hand & take away with the other.

Reduction in the basic rate of tax? Worthless...

Unfortenatly we have a gullible population who think wow income tax reduced we better off. All give and take with more of it been take in recent years. People who are less wealthy are generally worse off with reduced income tax and increased council tax as income tax is more linked to ability to pay.

---------- Post added at 13:18 ---------- Previous post was at 13:16 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

I like the idea there are legal wars If Iraq wasnt such a mess it would not be considered illegal.

Anyway, Depending on how you sum up all the taxs we are taxed less than European countrys. I.E France. But then they spend more on public services

Depends, someone on lower income here spends a higher proportion of their wealth on tax, whilst the wealthy here spend less. Mainly due to our over generous income tax system.

---------- Post added at 13:21 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ----------

Originally Posted by Bill C

So why should those that don't work because they cannot be arsed pay nothing . While those that got off there **** and did something with there lives and made it in to a good well payed job fund the **** bags.

Oh hang on we are now funding the **** bags when they are released from jail early so why not the **** bags that refuse to work.

Actually those who dont work generally pay less now anyway due to council tax benefit, the biggest losers under the current system are those who work but earn pennies.

Its very fair that those who earn more should pay more, the problem with society is they generally have the aittude of if you earning more it must mean you working harder.

---------- Post added at 13:24 ---------- Previous post was at 13:21 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

Calm down. Not everyone who 'doesnt work' is a lay-about. Disabilty, single parents and the eldely for example. This isnt Nazi Germany, we dont leave people to rot if they cant work.I wouldnt call people you dont know **** bugs just because you have jumped to conclusions about their lifestyles/personalitys/motives.

Something we rarely agree on

The idea of the tax system is to take those from who can pay and use it to fund public services and to provide for those who are in need. Some people forget this. Of course it does get abused but by a minority not a majority.

---------- Post added at 13:26 ---------- Previous post was at 13:24 ----------

Originally Posted by iglu

So, because he has mansion, he has to pay a huge council tax bill?

The council tax bill is for council services provided, and house size is a stupid way of allocating the amount you pay.

But the rich people pay up

http://www.nationmaster.com/red/grap...-by-richest-30


a lot

Tax isnt about getting value for money for yourself its not like buying something from a shop.

---------- Post added at 13:30 ---------- Previous post was at 13:26 ----------

Originally Posted by RXP

Because that's the fairest way to raise funds for public spending. What is currently happening is that masses of taxes are being diverted from income tax to all sorts of sales tax - this is regressive and hurts the poor more. Of course you can take it to extremes and target abusers of the system, but overall it's the best way. Your anger would probably be directed better at the super rich, rather than the 'lay abouts', who benefit far more from the welfare state than poor people (corporate welfare)

What should alarm anyone is that large corporations pay less tax than real people (30% versus 40%), they get tax cuts for a variety of reasons, escape taxes on dubious legal grounds and benefit from massive corporate welfare - subsidies, tariffs, various military/pharmaceutical projects that socialise risk, while priviatising profit. These profits are then tunneled into off shore bank accounts ,where they are free from tax when the rest of us earn tiny salaries in comparison and pay 40% of it to the government.

In the UK, we probably raise enough money from taxes to have the worlds best public services - unfortunately our governments are so corrupt that they sink billions into wars and oil, then claim that too much public spending might cause 'upwards inflationary pressure' to borrow the over used excuse.

Not much to disagree with there, if people did their research they would find generally as a corporation you have a higher tax window so can get more before you start paying tax, you pay a lower % and its then easier to shift profits off shore for tax avoidance on interest etc. Agree on the governments as well.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Business rates make normal council tax look cheap! I've bought bigger premises for my london clinic in the last year and my business rates have shot up and I have to pay extra for refuse removal.....thats not covered!
I phoned up the council to ask them what I get for my business rates (bearing in mind that I live round the corner from my business premises and pay the highest band on that property). They couldn't tell me what I get for my money but sent me a booklet. The booklet simply explained how they calculate business rates and what happens to me if I don't pay them. There was no mention of what the council provides me with for my money!

Business rates are sent to the Govt & then distributed according to some calculation or another throughout the country which is why you have a separate bill for waste collection.

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Actually those who dont work generally pay less now anyway due to council tax benefit, the biggest losers under the current system are those who work but earn pennies.

Its very fair that those who earn more should pay more, the problem with society is they generally have the aittude of if you earning more it must mean you working harder.

We already have income based taxation for National Insurance and Income Tax and to a lesser extent VAT, where those who spend more will pay more.

But what I don't understand is why Council Tax should be income based too, it's a flawed Liberal policy, which is unworkable efficiently and is only aimed at attracting the lower-paid to vote for them - and I would expect to see this one rear its head again in the next election too!

We have a communitry based expenditure for things like schools, waste collection etc and generally these are per capita expenses. It doesn't cost any more for someone earning 50k a year to send their child to school than it does for someone on a low wage - so why should they again pay more?

[Angua]

One expenditure everyone forgets the Council tax pays for is Highways maintenance on all the local roads and pavements for which households with several cars reap the most benefit. No council tax can ever be fair if it has to be a one size fits all. Poll tax penalised childless couples, council tax penalises pensioners who have worked hard all their lives.

As long as it is only based on where you live it penalises couples rattling round in large houses but not by that much as the difference between a band A property and a band G is only a few hundred pounds at most.

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by Angua

One expenditure everyone forgets the Council tax pays for is Highways maintenance on all the local roads and pavements for which households with several cars reap the most benefit.

Although highways are controlled by county coucils, not all of the expense comes from Council Tax, quite a lot comes from Central Government too for this purpose, funded in part by the Road Tax.

Originally Posted by Angua

No council tax can ever be fair if it has to be a one size fits all. Poll tax penalised childless couples, council tax penalises pensioners who have worked hard all their lives.

How did Poll Tax affect childless couples? Poll Tax affected households with lots of adult occupants but few wage earners worst.

Council tax does not penalise pensioners, as they recieve benefits to pay or help pay for it. As far as I can see, there's no real basis for your statements.

And it doesn't matter which method of collection is being used, if the total income has doubled in the last ten years then something is very wrong.

Originally Posted by Angua

As long as it is only based on where you live it penalises couples rattling round in large houses but not by that much as the difference between a band A property and a band G is only a few hundred pounds at most.

That's just plain wrong: in my area alone, a band A property is about £800 and a band G property is over £2,000 per year).

[Angua]

As for the range of payments I was basing it on this area with fairly small differences between each band.

Pensioner couples get no discounts unless they are in receipt of a means tested benefit, only single occupants get a 25% discount and this applies regardless of age or income. Is it just that people who have worked hard all their lives and finally bought the house of their dreams have to sell up and move because they can't afford the council tax?
Childless couples do not get the benefit of schooling for their children nor are they likely to be making use of social services. Admittedly under poll tax the hardest hit were households with several adults again these would also be like childless couples making little use of council services, however this has been mitigated by the introduction of council tax.

I look upon what I paid for whilst childless as an investment for the future when I or my family will make use of these things.

As for the Highways this area must be getting very short shrift from the Government as the state of many roads and pavements locally are appalling and the frequency of maintenance has dwindled alarmingly.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by andygrif

We already have income based taxation for National Insurance and Income Tax and to a lesser extent VAT, where those who spend more will pay more.

But what I don't understand is why Council Tax should be income based too, it's a flawed Liberal policy, which is unworkable efficiently and is only aimed at attracting the lower-paid to vote for them - and I would expect to see this one rear its head again in the next election too!

We have a communitry based expenditure for things like schools, waste collection etc and generally these are per capita expenses. It doesn't cost any more for someone earning 50k a year to send their child to school than it does for someone on a low wage - so why should they again pay more?

Recently the bottom rate of income tax was announced to be dropped and during the past decade the amount of tax paid by income tax has been steadily dropping, this is not a good thing. Within 2 years low earners income tax will double, NI isnt strictly income based like income tax is.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:33 ----------

Originally Posted by Angua

One expenditure everyone forgets the Council tax pays for is Highways maintenance on all the local roads and pavements for which households with several cars reap the most benefit. No council tax can ever be fair if it has to be a one size fits all. Poll tax penalised childless couples, council tax penalises pensioners who have worked hard all their lives.

As long as it is only based on where you live it penalises couples rattling round in large houses but not by that much as the difference between a band A property and a band G is only a few hundred pounds at most.

Personally I think the poll tax was fairer then what we have now, at least it addressed situations where many adults each with their own income in a house pay more of a fair share and single people paid half of a couple, of course poll tax wasnt perfect and was generally set to high but the principle of it was better I think.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Recently the bottom rate of income tax was announced to be dropped and during the past decade the amount of tax paid by income tax has been steadily dropping, this is not a good thing. Within 2 years low earners income tax will double, NI isnt strictly income based like income tax is.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:33 ----------



Personally I think the poll tax was fairer then what we have now, at least it addressed situations where many adults each with their own income in a house pay more of a fair share and single people paid half of a couple, of course poll tax wasnt perfect and was generally set to high but the principle of it was better I think.

Unfortunately if only one person was working and any other adults in the house were not entitled to benefits the wage earner had to foot the bill for everyone under the poll tax system! Hardly fair at all!

And as you rightly point out the current NI system in particular penalises the low wage earner especially those who earn just too much to qualify for any more than the basic child tax credit!

There was some talk of a flat rate tax system, which provided there were no loopholes and a decent threshold before you started to pay might be a fairer system all round.

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by Angua

As for the range of payments I was basing it on this area with fairly small differences between each band.

According to your profile you live in Cameron's constituency, which is West Oxon. West Oxon District Council's average charge for a Band A property is £831 and £2519 for a Band G property. More than a 'few hundred pounds'.

Originally Posted by Angua

Pensioner couples get no discounts unless they are in receipt of a means tested benefit, only single occupants get a 25% discount and this applies regardless of age or income. Is it just that people who have worked hard all their lives and finally bought the house of their dreams have to sell up and move because they can't afford the council tax?

Actually pensioners receive a windfall payment irrespective of income/savings from central government....but I take your point. However there's nothing to suggest it would be any different any other way...those pensioners with a little money put away will be paying Income Tax anyway.

Originally Posted by Angua

Childless couples do not get the benefit of schooling for their children nor are they likely to be making use of social services. Admittedly under poll tax the hardest hit were households with several adults again these would also be like childless couples making little use of council services, however this has been mitigated by the introduction of council tax.

So are you proposing a cherry-picked services form of taxation? You only pay for what you use? So childless couples are quite happy not funding education but those who do have children have to pay double to send their child to school? I think this is not only unfair but also virtually unworkable.

Originally Posted by Angua

As for the Highways this area must be getting very short shrift from the Government as the state of many roads and pavements locally are appalling and the frequency of maintenance has dwindled alarmingly.

I think this is pretty irrelivant to the discussion as we're talking about what the Council Tax is spent on as a whole and what other sources of funding are forthcoming.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Recently the bottom rate of income tax was announced to be dropped and during the past decade the amount of tax paid by income tax has been steadily dropping, this is not a good thing. Within 2 years low earners income tax will double, NI isnt strictly income based like income tax is.

I'm not sure what you're using to base this argument on, but the amount of money collected by R&C is increasing not decreasing: Source

Income Tax Income 07/08 - £157bn National Insurance £95bn
Income Tax Income 06/07 - £144bn National Insurance £90bn
Income Tax Income 05/06 - £138bn National Insurance £83bn

National Insurance is strictly income based to each of the thresholds, 11% then 1% Source

[Angua]

Originally Posted by andygrif

<snipped>

So are you proposing a cherry-picked services form of taxation? You only pay for what you use? So childless couples are quite happy not funding education but those who do have children have to pay double to send their child to school? I think this is not only unfair but also virtually unworkable.



<snipped>

You will also note (if you read back through my previous posts) I looked upon the amount I paid whilst childless as an investment for the future when I will make use of these services. So no cherry picking here. However given the amount of cuts most councils are making there wont be much left by the time I need it.

With regard to Council tax banding the majority for householders in the district live in properties between band B and band E so there is where the few hundred pounds difference is! The districts charge is only around a difference of £3.50 per band per annum as the charge is so low.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by andygrif

I'm not sure what you're using to base this argument on, but the amount of money collected by R&C is increasing not decreasing: Source

Income Tax Income 07/08 - £157bn National Insurance £95bn
Income Tax Income 06/07 - £144bn National Insurance £90bn
Income Tax Income 05/06 - £138bn National Insurance £83bn

National Insurance is strictly income based to each of the thresholds, 11% then 1% Source

The % of tax collected via income tax is dropping not the total amount of income tax collected.

NI is taxed at a lower % once a threshold is hit hence not strictly income based so big earners pay a smaller % of their income in NI then lower earners.

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by Angua

You will also note (if you read back through my previous posts) I looked upon the amount I paid whilst childless as an investment for the future when I will make use of these services. So no cherry picking here. However given the amount of cuts most councils are making there wont be much left by the time I need it.

I saw that...but I was asking if you supported cherry-picked services? So I assume the answer is no, but you don't actually give an alternative. You say Council Tax is wrong, Poll Tax is wrong - so what's the solution?

Originally Posted by Angua

With regard to Council tax banding the majority for householders in the district live in properties between band B and band E so there is where the few hundred pounds difference is! The districts charge is only around a difference of £3.50 per band per annum as the charge is so low.

Do you know how Council Tax works? The District Council charge is always small, the vast majority of the payment goes to County, even though District Councils collect it. It's pretty pointless saying what the District charge if the County charge is expensive!

The average difference between band B and E in your area is nearly £600...so why don't you just say that the difference between Band B and Band D is "only a few hundred Pounds", which would actually be accurate...that would mean you wouldn't have to keep moving the goalposts on each post!

Better still...look at what is actually does cost you in Council Tax in your area here http://www.westoxon.gov.uk/files/download/3954-1524.pdf

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

The % of tax collected via income tax is dropping not the total amount of income tax collected.

How can it when you drop the lowest rate in tax? Besides, the jump from 2006 to 2007 is over 9% when average earnings increased in the same period by less than 4%.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

NI is taxed at a lower % once a threshold is hit hence not strictly income based so big earners pay a smaller % of their income in NI then lower earners.

Now you've explained what you actually meant we can agree on your definition, which was as I described in my earlier post.

[Angua]

As long as central government continues to dictate how much money local government can have/raise the system will be unfair, as not only do central government require more to be done locally on the one hand, they also limit how they can pay for it on the other.

I do not have the answers but poll tax was too closely related to household members and not income it hit the poorest (non benefit claiming) hardest (I did one weeks work a month just paying poll tax). Council tax is at least slightly fairer as you are likely to live where you can afford, and again this hits households with only one wage earner.

At least with local income tax, every tax payer would contribute something rather than the majority paying nothing.

Hope everyone knows or indeed remembers that the Tories 'robbed' the local government pension funds to keep the then Community Charge at a lower level. I think Labour have done a good job if the level of Council Tax has only doubled since they came to power - you can't have your cake and eat it, you want decent public services, you pay for it, simple as that.

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by Angua

As long as central government continues to dictate how much money local government can have/raise the system will be unfair, as not only do central government require more to be done locally on the one hand, they also limit how they can pay for it on the other.

We agree on that one...we're in a position right now where Council Tax bills are at the ludicrous rate they are whilst central government is cutting their funding.

Originally Posted by Angua

I do not have the answers but poll tax was too closely related to household members and not income it hit the poorest (non benefit claiming) hardest (I did one weeks work a month just paying poll tax). Council tax is at least slightly fairer as you are likely to live where you can afford, and again this hits households with only one wage earner.

Except that if we maintained the Poll Tax and increased it at the rate of inflation I would expect the total bill for the majority of households to be less that the current figures are with the Council Tax.

However, it wouldn't make any difference which method of collecting local taxes you use as the funding from central government would still have been cut dramatically under this Labour government and the black-hole that is local government would still need to collect their money.

Originally Posted by Angua

At least with local income tax, every tax payer would contribute something rather than the majority paying nothing.

Local income tax wouldn't be any different, except that you would need the Revenue & Customs to collect it, adding huge additional manpower requirements in another poorly functioning central department, you'd need to assign different tax codes for people living in different parts of the country and then you would have to distribute the monies, usually paid in bulk lots by employers on an annual basis, back out to the local authorities.

If going down this route is unlikely to keep the costs down IMHO.

Originally Posted by NEONKNIGHT

Hope everyone knows or indeed remembers that the Tories 'robbed' the local government pension funds to keep the then Community Charge at a lower level. I think Labour have done a good job if the level of Council Tax has only doubled since they came to power - you can't have your cake and eat it, you want decent public services, you pay for it, simple as that.

And Gordon Brown did it to everyone else...nothing much between them really is there? Except that Gordon Brown did whilst raising taxes and watching local authorities reducing public services, as discussed before.